When partner opens/rebids 2NT:
3♣ = 4+S, 3♦ = 4+H, 0-3S
2N:3♣ – respond like Stayman (3♠ with 4S4H)
Over 3♦ – 3♥ = 5+S xfer, 3♠ = 4S5+H, 3N+ = precisely 4S
Over 3♥ – 3♠ = puppet->3N, either a hand with precisely 4S or a slam-try in hearts, others = 5+S
Over 3♠ – 3N/4♣/4♦/4♥ = NAT slam-tries
2N:3♦ – 3♥ denies 4 hearts, 3♠ shows 4+H
Over 3♥ – 3♠ = puppet to 3N with precisely 4 hearts, others = 5+hearts
Over 3♠, 4♦ = rexfer, 3N/4♣ = NAT slam-tries, 4♥+above = slam-tries with diamonds
Disadvantages -
Compared to regular Stayman, there are more opportunities for the oppo to double for the lead.
Compared to puppet Stayman, we don't find out when opener has a five-card major.
There's less room for slam-tries when responder has 4-4 majors and opener has 4H but not 4S.
Advantages -
Obviously, the big one is freeing up 2N:3♥
4M5+m responders get to show both of their suits (unlike 2N:3♣, 3♦:4m playing Stayman)
More room for slam-tries when we have a 4-4 spade fit
Any thoughts? Not quite sure what 2N:3M should be, perhaps shortage?
It doesn't seem strictly neccessary to have 2N:3♣, 3♠ showing four cards - these hands could go above 3♠ - but then opener's 3♠ rebid would need to be very well defined, perhaps 33(43)? Obviously that's a lot of disclosure to the defence and gives responder less room to describe his hand, not sure it's worth it.
This post has been edited by MickyB: 2008-May-26, 15:07

Help

s
t
r-m
nd
ing) tr. v. - Any bid made by bridge player with which partner disagrees.